wakehand

Hi All, new member here. I've had an interest in RC for the last 20 years but never had the time or space to get started. Circumstances have changed and I'm now ready to jump right in and make up for lost time. At this point I'm more into building then flying, the journey being more meaningful then the destination... if that makes sense?

Anyways, I'd like your insight on how to progress through this hobby as a kit builder. So will each kit give me the skills to move on to a progressively more difficult build. I'll throw out a list to frame up what I'm thinking.

Sig LT-40 (is in the mail)
Sig cub 1/5
Topflite p-47
CCW beaver (don't know much about ccw but I love beavers)
Zirolli and other "advanced" modeller kits

Any thoughts or wisdom is appreciated.

Square Nozzle

My Feedback: (1)

It looks like you are starting on the right path. The LT-40 will be a good starter to learn to fly. Also have to say that Sig kits are well thought out and the instructions are very helpful for a beginner.

vogelm1

My Feedback: (1)

That looks like a fun list of planes for the bucket list. You may wish to add a low-wing sport plane in there after the cub; these typically have a bit more speed and good for hand-eye coordination development.

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

I like it. I've always said if a prospective builder builds a kit or 2 from each manufacturer (IE Sig, TopFlite, GreatPlanes, Midwest, Goldberg, and a few more)... they will come away with so many techniques that will carry them through the hobby. Each kit and manual will have tips and techniques that are unique, and put them all together and you can build anything with confidence.

Great start with the Sig LT40. If those are built by the book you're nearly guaranteed a good flying plane... and it will get easier and better from there. Very nice thing about the Sig kits, for the most part they can be built with ordinary tools found around the house, and you'll get a chance to see what/where you want to go as far as tools and your shop as well.

A few other nice planes as you progress might be a Goldberg Tiger2 or Tiger60, Great Planes Sportster, or one of their Extra300's... depending on what type of building you find you like.. just a few thoughts, as I've built a few or more of these over the years and progressed from there (built a few dozen of different sorts since then..). Each kit I've built taught me something, and every one of them flies well.

Welcome to building!!

TomCrump

Good advice.
Some manufacturers utilize different building techniques in different models. For instance Sig's LT-40 will build quite differently than Sig's 1/4 Cub and their Spacewalkers.

The LT uses jig lock construction. The Cub and Spacewalkers are a little more complicated, using a lot of sticks, and therefore a lot of measuring and cutting.

The OP will not see much difference in construction methods, between the Sig 1/5 Cub and the LT-40.

The pics are my Spacewalker's fuselage.

wakehand

Thanks for the warm welcome! That's some good advice on mixing up kit manufacturers, I'll keep it in mind.

I need to order an engine for the LT-40 and if possible I'd like to reuse it for the the Cub. However I think this approach may leave me with an overpowered trainer... Also, I understand that there's a conversion factor at play when choosing a 2-stroke vs. 4-stroke engine, but is there any sizing up needed when comparing a 4-stroke nitro to gas? As I believe they make a little less power? To cut to the chase, would a Saito FG-11 be able to bridge between the two models?

DGrant

My Feedback: (4)

If your talking about the "FG-11" I would say that might bridge a gap somewhat. It might take a bit of ingenuity to fit that gas rig into a plane that was designed with a glow-engine in mind... but overall I think it would be a decent choice if you stuck to the plans as much as you can.

An engine like this would be very economical to run no doubt... and it's well within specs of a recommended four-stroke engine I think. 11cc is right about .61ci.. and in a four-stroke that's just right for a .40 two-stroke replacement. I would do it.

Although do study it, and double check what I'm saying... You'll find what's right for you I'm sure. I really like this size and type of plane with a four-stroke glow engine in about that size range... so I seriously think I'd really like it with a gas rig. This is only my opinion, but if it were me, I'd take a serious look at it... and I do think it's an excellent topic to study and discus.

I'm a big four-stroke fan these days actually. I've found they run very clean, they're very quiet, you can run a bigger prop and have torque to spare, and once set(usually very easy to do) they run forever... so I might be partial lately. Know that there might be a bit more learning curve with the four-stroke engine, as well as the ignition involved, but once learned, you could put an engine like that in anything you want. I hope that makes sense.

carlgrover

I would build an Astro Hog right after that LT40. It will make a great second plane and is of very traditional construction. Another choice would be a Trainer 40 or 60, if you can find one. I know you can get plans for them all over the place. Shouldn't be too hard to build from plans.

carl